Register now to get rid of these ads!

Technical Ford FE questions

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by 4 pedals, Dec 25, 2020.

  1. 4 pedals
    Joined: Oct 8, 2009
    Posts: 958

    4 pedals
    Member
    from Nor Cal

    My parts chaser is a 1970 F100 with a 360. I redid the heads a couple of years ago, but it's absolutely stone stock and under powered. A guy local to me has listed some FE stuff for sale, including a 1U crank and a 410 block. Ideally, I'd like to put together a 10:1 410 with about a 262 cam in it, just for building torque. Is there any difference between a 410 block and my 360? I understand the bore is the same.

    Thanks

    Devin
     
  2. Spooky
    Joined: Mar 3, 2001
    Posts: 2,239

    Spooky
    Member

  3. Marty Strode
    Joined: Apr 28, 2011
    Posts: 8,801

    Marty Strode
    Member

    As I remember, 360's had 390 pistons that put it down in the bore. They did the same with the truck 390, that used 410 pistons. In the 70's I bought a new 390 truck short block, along with a 428-CJ crank, and made a deck high 410, with 10 to 1 CR. When the octane rating dropped it pinged like hell. Not sure how a 10 to 1 engine would last these days.
     
    alanp561 likes this.
  4. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 6,442

    Boneyard51
    Member

    Your 360 block is the same as a 390 and the 410. The 3.98 410/428 crank in your block will give you 410, an engine that Mercury had for 1966/67 only! You can use 390 truck pistons in this combo, it will get you close to 10 to 1. Some 390 truck( pick up, not FT) pistons even had 410 casted on them. The stock Ford 3.98 crank was externaly balanced so you will need the correct flywheel or flex plate. The value in those parts is the crank. Just for reference, Scat sells that crank for about $400 and you can use your 360 flywheel .

    While you have your heads off remove the exhaust manifolds and find some better exhaust, add dual exhaust. FE truck headers are cheap. Then upgrade to electronic ignition and send your distributor to Faron Rhoades and have him recurve it.

    After doing this add a EdlebrockPerformer RPM aluminum intake and a 650 vacuum secondaries or if you want to stay two barrel add a Holley 500 cfm to your stock intake.
    Before choosing you cam, figure out what additions you are going to do and contact Oregon cams and have him select the cam for your needs. They are FE friendly!




    Bones
     
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2020

  5. 4 pedals
    Joined: Oct 8, 2009
    Posts: 958

    4 pedals
    Member
    from Nor Cal

    Thanks to all who replied.

    I wasn't aware that the 3.98 crank was externally balanced. A flywheel makes up the difference between his asking price and a new crank from Scat.

    I did headers and dual exhaust a couple of years ago, which led to me pulling the heads and rebuilding them at that time. I did put a S four bbl manifold on it with a Holley 600 about 10 years ago.

    Devin
     
    Boneyard51 likes this.
  6. One word of caution, I would not attempt to bore the block more than .030 in. without checking to see how much metal is available. I bought one 390 block that had been bored .100 in, and the bore was so thin in one spot that it flexed enough to crack and allow water in.
    I have heard that the 70s truck blocks have more meat in them, and if you can find the heavy duty truck blocks, they were factory equipped with a forged crank. The only issue, is that to use this crank, the front has to be machined to mount the car front pulley.
    On one of my 428s, I am running the Ford single 4 bbl high rise aluminum manifold, with a matching Holley, and a mild cam. I am very happy with the combination.
    Bob
     
  7. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 6,442

    Boneyard51
    Member

    FEs were known for some core shift. I would recommend a sonic test on any FE I was going to spend money on. Some blocks will take being overbored, some won’t. Some folks try to bore the 360/390 engines with a bore of 4.050 out to make a 428 out of those blocks. 428s have a bore of 4.130 so you have to bore the 390 .080. It has been done, but some times it is not successful. 428 blocks are cast different ( thicker) to accept the larger bores, and there are ways to tell if you have a 428 block. As with anything Ford, especially FE never say never or always! Some regular FE blocks have thicker walls than others, but the only way to be sure is a sonic test.
    I did what you are planning to do a many years ago. 390 +.030 +3.98 crank for 416 cubic inches. 390 GT heads with a little work, headman headers, mild cam, S code intake, 750 vacuum secondaries ,Electronic ignition, 2600 stall C-6 3.73 rear gear with huge 17.36X16.5 tires. That truck ran like a scolded dog! Came out of the hole crazy! I built this engine in the previous century and probably didn’t get the disturber just right. I probably left a few ponies on the table. Today I would send my disturber to Faron Rhoades and have him do a recurve and rebuild.
    You will like your truck better after you do some of these modifications.






    Bones
     
  8. Supposedly the early blocks up to about '62 could take larger overbores as Ford was sneaking up on their new-at-the-time thinwall casting techniques. There were reputable reports of guys boring early ('58-60) 352 blocks out to the 428 size (.130 over) in the late '60s, and Ford did .050 over for the 361 Edsel motors. Core shifting could be an issue even with those at the bigger bore sizes. By the late '60s, .040 over was the absolute max on current blocks unless the block water jackets were filled and/or sonic checking was done, block fill was common on the drag race motors.

    Check out Survival Motorsports. Want more FE inches? How about a 445" torque monster that bolts into a .030 over 360/390 block for $2K for the complete reciprocating assembly? Internally balanced, so no 'special' flywheel needed.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2020
  9. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 6,442

    Boneyard51
    Member

    Steve, that’s what I saving up for! Mine is going to be the 462 cubic inch version for the 428 I pulled out of a 1966 Parklane, I bought thirty years ago. I tend to plan way ahead and progress slow! But I did pull the engine out a couple of months ago! Lol:D

    I’m still in the gathering of parts stage! I have most of my 3X2 set up, my 1965 cast iron long tube headers, a set of harden seat heads. Lack the C-6 and drive shaft for parts, and the 462 kit, obviously. Still have to get my heads done at Kieths and block bored. Then I’ll be ready! Hopefully!






    Bones
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2020
  10. finn
    Joined: Jan 25, 2006
    Posts: 1,280

    finn
    Member

    Seems like I recall the thick wall 391 FT truck blocks had a different size distributor bore that required a custom sleeve / bushing to use a common FE distributor.
     
    Deuces and Boneyard51 like this.
  11. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 6,442

    Boneyard51
    Member

    You are correct! Lots of folks like to use the FT blocks, they seem to be cast thicker. You cannot use the FT heads with out a lot of work and they don’t flow good anyway. Like mentioned the FT cranks can be steel, but require some work to fit FEs.








    Bones
     
    Deuces and Truckdoctor Andy like this.
  12. 4 pedals
    Joined: Oct 8, 2009
    Posts: 958

    4 pedals
    Member
    from Nor Cal

    Thanks again to all who responded. At this point, it looks like I'll pass on what the seller has to offer, but I have a better idea on how to move forward when I'm ready. I'm thinking for my truck a long stroke/ small bore combo is going to make me happiest. I rarely even run the 360 up to 3500 rpm (it makes noises I don't like) but adding 50 cubic inches and 2 points of compression with a fresh bottom end will make a huge difference. Once my drag car is done, I will likely use this as my tow vehicle as well.

    Devin
     
  13. 57Custom300
    Joined: Aug 21, 2009
    Posts: 1,424

    57Custom300
    Member
    from Arizona

    Picked up a 61 Starliner a few years ago where the po used a 391FT to achieve 406 cu in. It ran pretty ragged mainly because the 3x2 set up needed help. Even though it was supposed to be a fairly fresh engine I had to tear it down to see what I had. They used a 0.010/0.010 390 crank and a set of 406 flat top pistons on the build. The only odd thing I saw was the pistons were "a mile" in the hole. Ok I'm exaggerating a bit. Took everything to the shop I use and explained what I had. I wanted the pistons as close to 0 deck as he could. He said he would see what he could. Had everything balanced while it was there. When I checked it after reassembly they ended up 0.023 in the hole. I checked the spec in the book (I think I looked at 427) and that was the spec for that engine. I was satisfied with that. Installed an Oregon camshaft a bit warmer than the C3AZ-AA that was in it. Back in the car, it runs good and is reliable but still needs some tweaking. Needs the distributor curved plus it only has a 3.00 gear in back.
     
    Deuces likes this.
  14. Boneyard51
    Joined: Dec 10, 2017
    Posts: 6,442

    Boneyard51
    Member

    You didn’t mention what transmission you have, but with a 3 to 1 rear gear, I’m guessing a C-6 auto. Ford designed most of the C-6 torque converters a little tight, in order to get better fuel mileage. This tight torque converter, really hurts take off. Add a torque converter with a little higher stall, will do wonders for take off!








    Bones
     
    Deuces likes this.
  15. finn
    Joined: Jan 25, 2006
    Posts: 1,280

    finn
    Member

    The C6 didn’t come out until ‘66, so it could have been a plain old Cruisomatic.
     
    Deuces and Boneyard51 like this.
  16. 57Custom300
    Joined: Aug 21, 2009
    Posts: 1,424

    57Custom300
    Member
    from Arizona

     
    Deuces and Boneyard51 like this.

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.